It is almost as if elements of the mainstream media are an arm of the Obama campaign and haven't shown serious signs of letting go of the relationship since the last presidential election cycle. Ironically, the Obama camp and many on the left insist that the media at large leans right - that they're actually AGAINST liberals and leftist politics. This of course is nothing more than a pure politik response to the claim of left-leaning media bias. When someone accuses you of something, you accuse them of the very same thing.
Deny. Deflect. Denigrate. Politics; not what they teach you in school.
The media favoritism granted to Mr. Obama has shown itself to be unmatched by the love any politician has received in American history. We see it no more clearly than now, with President Obama's disastrous mishandling of the events in Libya and Egypt - the result of his deeply flawed Mideast policy and his message to followers of radical Islam around the world.
Instead of discussing and scrutinizing the President and his clueless administration, the main stream media targets none other than Mitt Romney and has the gall to allow Obama et al to blame the protests solely on a goofy, poorly produced 14 minute "trailer" for a movie that doesn't exist.
PUH - LEEEEEAZE.....
The liberal American media and far-left blogosphere is alight with critical coverage about what Mitt Romney said regarding Obama's handling of the attacks on our Embassies but we all know that the real story has to do with the administration's policies and the incidents themselves, which could have been prevented. A stark, glaring bias is quite clear.
In the meantime, the rest of the world media is reporting that the Obama administration had at least some intelligence and warnings prior to the attacks on the Benghazi, Libya Embassy where four of our fellow Americans, including United States Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were murdered.
That's the story. The real cause of the incidents aside.
The fact that these were planned and coordinated aside.
The fact that they occurred on September 11th aside.
The story is that the Obama Administration blew it big time, not the comments of his political opponent: a man who currently has nothing to do with the decisions made in the Oval Office, the State Department, the U.S. Embassy, or the attacks themselves.
The story, for those interested in what is actually pertinent and newsworthy, obviously involves the White House and the president, Barack Obama. Those so called reporters and bloggers who have made Mitt Romney the story instead of the actual story are complicit in allowing the truth about another American tragedy to remain covered in bullshit.
The attacks didn't just happen. While the movie trailer "Innocence of Muslims" could have added some fuel to the protests, it is widely understood that these attacks were planned well in advance. The video was posted on YouTube on July 2, 2012 and until the day before the attacks only received 155 page views.
Why then did it take nine weeks for the Muslim world to get so angry about a video virtually none of them had seen?
Why did the attacks take place on the commemorative day of September 11th?
Why were the "protesters" so strategically organized, using a carefully orchestrated combination of direct and indirect fire?
Why didn't the Administration, namely the State Department, send our diplomats to more secure locations - (in Libya, they should have been back in Tripoli, not in the far less secure Benghazi consulate) - after the Egyptians and the Libyan transitional government issued warnings to us two days in advance?
Why has Obama skipped more than half of his daily intelligence briefings during a period of such intense global unrest? On Monday September 10, one day prior to the start of the recent upheaval in the Middle East, President Obama did not receive the presidential daily briefing.
And why isn't the mainstream media reporting on these particulars?
Instead, here's what happened among the network pundits and American media outlets:
CNN ran away with the "Innocence of Muslims" movie story and went so far as to out its producer's identity, thereby putting his life and the life of his family and all the actors in the movie in jeopardy. CNN even editorialized by stating that the film would be "Oscar worthy, if HATEFUL were a category", continuing CNN's long-standing tradition of substituting factual reporting for explosive hyberbole. The "most trusted name in news" helped the terrorists locate their man and aided the Obama Administration in the scapegoating of Nikoula B. Nikoula in order to distract from the failed leadership in the Middle East. They omitted any discussion of Mideast policy or State Department failure.
The New York Times, as could be expected, accused Romney of “dangerous ignorance” and “an extraordinary lack of presidential character.” President Obama jumped in behind them to complain that “Governor Romney seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim later.”
On September 12, the Times reported: “American and European officials said that while many details about the attack remained unclear, the assailants seemed organized, well trained and heavily armed, and they appeared to have at least some level of advance planning. But the officials cautioned that it was too soon to tell whether the attack was related to the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.”
ABC and its program This Week allowed U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to come on the show and make the administration’s case without criticism of her statements. Rice claimed: “Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo.”
NBC's Rachel Maddow tried to go after Romney but actually ended up making more of a case that his assessment of the situation was correct. Maddow laid out a lot of facts and a storyline which painted a picture of intelligence failures and boneheaded communication screw-ups on the part of the Obama Administration going back months. After practically indicting the President with her factual reporting she then turned and launched into this ridiculous commentary in closing:
"The whole reason there are domestic politics in this story at all is because while the US government was being physically attacked abroad...while the US consulate in Libya and the US embassy in Egypt were under siege, before the attacks were over, while they were still happening, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney put out a statement also attacking the US embassy in Cairo. There were already reports at that point that at least one American had been killed in Benghazi, he referenced that in his statement. But that did not stop him from attacking the other embassy, from waging a political attack at all. It did not give him pause that maybe he should wait to find out more about what was happening before he spoke. Not only did he not wait for more information, he did not wait until the attacks had even stopped before he added his own attack on the staff of the embassy in Egypt."
What?
First of all, the timing of Romney's statements does not coincide with this narrative. Our Embassy in Cairo was attacked first, then the Embassy in Benghazi. Romney's comments came the NEXT MORNING.
Maddow uses the word "attacks" as if Romney was a jihadist present in front of one of the embassies. This is so blatantly absurd.
In all fairness, the only major news outlet (that isn't Fox News) that released a fair-handed commentary about what is going on was CBS DC online on September 17, 2012. The article was titled "Obama's Security Breach In Libya Is Ignored by American Media" Unfortunately, this article was countered by the network's ongoing television coverage which continued to focus on Romney's statements.
FOX NEWS interviewed Rep. Mike Rogers, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee following his briefings the day after the attacks. The evidence showed the Benghazi attacks were planned. “Absolutely, I have no doubt about it. It was a coordinated, military-style, commando-type raid.”
Several days later, during his appearance on FOX NEWS SUNDAY, Rogers, a former FBI agent, reiterated his view that the attacks were planned and challenged the administration’s story. “The way that the attack took place, I have serious questions. It seemed to be a military style coordinated. They had indirect fire, coordinated with direct fire, rocket attacks. They were able to launch two different separate attacks on locations there near the consulate and they repelled a fairly significant Libyan force that came to rescue the embassy,” he said. “And then it was on 9/11 and there is other information, classified information, that we have that just makes you stop for a minute and pause. And as the first thing you learn as a young FBI agent in this, there are coincidences but they're not likely, and there are a lot of coincidences about this event.”
But what does he know?
So, you can see, much like the way the Obama Administration dropped the ball with the famous underwear bomber on Christmas Day 2009 by insisting that “the system worked” when it clearly hadn't, there is another case of rewriting the actual story. In that instance, if you recall, Obama called the perpetrator, Abdulmutallab, an "isolated extremist" when, in fact he'd been trained by Al Queda in the Arabian Peninsula.
Similarly, the administration dismissed reports of a wider conspiracy when Faisal Shahzad attempted to detonate a car bomb in Times Square. Janet Napolitano claimed the failed attack was just a "one-off" by a single terrorist. Wrong again.
There are two patterns here. The first is the Obama administration holding defiantly onto whatever storyline makes them least culpable and most politically advantaged long after evidence has proven the contrary. The second is the mainstream media allowing the administration to get away with the failures and the ensuing whitewash.
Last spring a senior State Department official said "the war on terror is over". This is overtly political. It's insulting on a number of levels. And it's dangerous. The war on terror will be with us for decades to come if not longer. All the politicking in the universe by the best spin doctors in existence won't change that.
If for nothing else, in the honor and memory of United States Ambassador Christopher Stevens, officer Sean Smith, security consultant and former Navy SEAL Glen Doherty, and security personnel Tyrone Woods, we need to insist on the true story being told.
